Author
Topic: Was the Rich Young Ruler Saved as an elect of God?- Mark 10:21 (Read 14625 times)

Mark 10:17-18 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.

As Melanie says, Christ is teaching the rich young ruler his error in understanding the law and the prophets. He is demonstrating in His question that man has two needs. #1., He needs to understand exactly who Jesus was if He was good. And #2., He needed to understand that no man was good. By Christ asking the man, "why callest Thou me good," He is really giving him a two-fold answer. That one, since there is none good but God, if you are calling Jesus good, you are calling Jesus God. And two, that the law clearly states that no man is good (Psalms 53:2-3; Romans 3:12), it is proven this man was not righteous as he thought, but was in need of a Savior.

Lu 16:15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.

Self-justification or self-righteousness is what Christ was demonstrating here. The rich young ruler thought he was a righteous man (Matthew 19:20), when before God he was actually a sanctimonious lawbreaker headed for hell. So he needed to repent of his high view of himself, and it is the Lord, who is truly good, who would provide the help of righteousness in this area.

Isaiah 43:11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

The only way fot man to be good, is to be saved by Christ. In this scenareo we see a general picture of the average person, christian or non-christian, who believes that he is really a good person deep down in his heart. This leads them to believe that God will reward them "because" they are relatively good people. As this righ young ruler, they don't really understand that being a relatively good person will not get anyone into heaven. How good does a person need to be in order to go to heaven? Well, he has to be perfect, one without any fault at all.

James 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

This rich young ruler believed in his own righteousness (Matthew 19:20) to bring him close to God, while Christ is teaching that he really didn't understand the law, and was himself a lawbreaker headed for hell. Christ is teaching that in order to be a good man, he has to be totally righteousness. He has to repent of his self-righteousness and turn to the Lord, the only good man who could help him in this area unto salvation.

Psalm 34:8: O taste and see that the LORD is good: blessed is the man that trusteth in him.

Trust in the true riches for salvation, not in temporal possessions or self-righteousness. Trust in God, who alone will save.

"21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.

22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions."

Was this young ruler an elect of God? I ask because it says Jesus "loved" him. I don't believe in common love so I assumed he must've been elect but so many people say that it was a "human compassion/love" that he had for the young ruler, not an electing love, and that proof of his reprobation is that he went away sorrowful. Any thoughts?

It appears that no one is eager to answer your questions, so I will give you my thoughts:I believe that you are correct with your analysis. Although, this is a conclusion from silence (nothing is said about him again), it is rather clear, that God loves his elect and does not love the non-elect.

Logged

The only regret that I have is that I only have one life to live for my God.

This seems to make it difficult to understand how God could love one while he is putting the world above God? An amazing thought:

Romans 5:7-10 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

God's love is truly amazing

Bill

Logged

The only regret that I have is that I only have one life to live for my God.

I don't believe that. If so, then why did he go away sad and grieved because of what Christ said? Rich men don't grieve when told they have to give away their riches unless they have to give away their riches. What's to grieve over if you have no intention of doing what was asked? You'd go away in a huff saying "I'm not doing that, you must be crazy." To be sad assumes he's sad about giving up something not sad because he's not giving up anything. What reprobate who is rich do you know that would go away grieved when someone said they had to give up their riches. They might go away laughing, or go away disappointed, or angry or they would simply find a religion where they wouldn't have to give up their riches. Which they would find in abundance everywhere as they are as common as grass. Even there in Israel.

I think he was saddened and grieved because God touched his heart and he was moved to come to the realization of these things he had to so. That is what brings grief and sorrow to someone rich, not someone asking him to do something he has no intention of doing. Moreover, Christ loved him and that's enough to have us consider that his grief was God induced as the beginning of repentance and change. People don't change instantly, there is a time of Sanctification. I believe because Christ loved this man, in time he came to be saved because he was an elect, loved of God.

His grief and sadness at Christ's words far from supporting him as an unchanged reprobate, shows me he was involved in change because he was sad and grieved. Look at the Apostle Paul. He was at the first a Persecutor of Christians, but he was also an elect who was moved to glory and sanctification afterward. Who changed his heart except He who loved him?

Matthew, Mark and Luke all record the touching scene in which a wealthy, religious leader in his twenties or early thirties, usually referred to as the rich young ruler, comes to Christ and, kneeling before Him, asks about inheriting eternal life.

The good news is that the Lord Jesus "loved" the rich young ruler (Mark 10:21)! This young man is in fine company, along with John, the beloved disciple; Lazarus, Mary and Martha (John 11:5); the believing leper (Mark 1:41); and all God's people in all ages and lands. "Many waters cannot quench love, neither can the floods drown it" (Song 8:7); how much more the deep, unchangeable, powerful love of God in Christ Jesus from which nothing in the present or future, nothing in life or death, nothing in the universe, not even Satan or sin, is "able to separate us" (Rom. 8:38-39)! All whom Jesus loves, He loves "unto the end" (John 13:1), for He is "the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever" -Hebrews. 13:8!

Christ loved the rich young ruler, even though he was self-righteous and loved money (Mark 10:20, 22). Jesus loved him from before the foundation of the world, when He died for his sins on the cross (John 10:15; 15:13), when He renewed his heart and into eternity. In His amazing grace, the Son of God loved the rich young ruler (and all His people) "with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness" He drew him (Jer. 31:3).

Out of love for the rich young ruler, Christ spoke to him of his sinful love of money, calling him to repentance. The young man went away, as Jesus commanded him, to count the cost (Mark 10:21-22). His grief and sadness was not a worldly sorrow but a "godly sorrow [that] worketh repentance to salvation" (II Cor. 7:10).

As Jesus explained, it is "hard," even "impossible" with men, for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God, because we are so prone to "trust in riches," but "with God all things are possible" (Mark 10:23-27)! Our God, the God of the impossible, gave a son to Sarah, a barren ninety-year-old, and her hundred-year-old husband, Abraham (Gen. 18:14); brought Israel back from the Babylonian captivity (Jer. 32:17); and caused the virgin Mary to conceive and bear the incarnate Son of God (Luke 1:37)! He can and did the impossible in converting the rich young ruler, as He has done for many like him, both before and since!

That look of love that the Saviour cast upon the rich young ruler two thousand years ago (Mark 10:21; Ps. 4:6), he continually beholds in heaven from the face of the glorified Christ who loved him and gave Himself for him (Gal. 2:20). What amazing grace and what an amazing salvation for all who forsake their sins and trust in Christ alone and not their own good works or riche

Christ doesn't love those who love their riches more than God. In fact, He calls them fools (Luke 12:16-21), not those whom He loves.

Psalms 5:5 "The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity".

The scriptures tell us that God hates all workers of iniquity, and it also tells us that Christ beheld and loved this rich young ruler. So then, if we accept the authority of scripture, then this ruler was an elect of God, whom Christ loved. And Christ loves with perfect love, not as man loves.

1 John 4:18-19 "There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love. We love him, because he first loved us".

I don't believe that. If so, then why did he go away sad and grieved because of what Christ said? Rich men don't grieve when told they have to give away their riches unless they have to give away their riches. What's to grieve over if you have no intention of doing what was asked? You'd go away in a huff saying "I'm not doing that, you must be crazy." To be sad assumes he's sad about giving up something not sad because he's not giving up anything. What reprobate who is rich do you know that would go away grieved when someone said they had to give up their riches. They might go away laughing, or go away disappointed, or angry or they would simply find a religion where they wouldn't have to give up their riches. Which they would find in abundance everywhere as they are as common as grass. Even there in Israel.

I think he was saddened and grieved because God touched his heart and he was moved to come to the realization of these things he had to so. That is what brings grief and sorrow to someone rich, not someone asking him to do something he has no intention of doing. Moreover, Christ loved him and that's enough to have us consider that his grief was God induced as the beginning of repentance and change. People don't change instantly, there is a time of Sanctification. I believe because Christ loved this man, in time he came to be saved because he was an elect, loved of God.

His grief and sadness at Christ's words far from supporting him as an unchanged reprobate, shows me he was involved in change because he was sad and grieved. Look at the Apostle Paul. He was at the first a Persecutor of Christians, but he was also an elect who was moved to glory and sanctification afterward. Who changed his heart except He who loved him?

Reformer, :GoodPopst: This was a very excellent and well thought our explanation. God has blessed you with a great understanding and ability to write.

Bill

Logged

The only regret that I have is that I only have one life to live for my God.

Are any of you actually reading the text? This man was obviously not saved. Christ told him to do something and he left Christ because he couldn't do it. What more proof do you need?

Hi Fred,

No one is saying that the rich ruler was saved, but we are saying that he was elect. If you read Reformers post about Paul and then think about the difference between being elect vs being saved, I think that it might make some sense to you.

An elect person is one who is loved and chosen (predestined) by God. It is totally impossible for an elect person to die in his sins and to go to Hell before he is saved (redeemed, regenerated, adopted, justified and sanctified). I realize that the Arminians have a different view, but I am so sorry, but they are wrong and that mistake will prevent them from going to Heaven, because they are trying to merit Heaven by their works (actions).

Bill

Logged

The only regret that I have is that I only have one life to live for my God.

Amen. To wonder if this his grieving response is part of his salvation process is to miss the context of the chapter.

Mark 10:14 But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.15 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.16 And he took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them.

... rich young ruler ...

23 And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!24 And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.26 And they were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved?27 And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.

The rich young ruler was just the illustration of the same thing the disciples voiced. They were all grieving over recognition that nothing in them or in their past has any bearing on getting into heaven. There are only two ways to view it. There is the disciple whom Jesus loved and there are the disciples who try to love Jesus. And like Peter, all in the second category have to reach the point of 'Peter do you love me?' After the cross, Peter knew he could not use the word agape love that Christ Jesus used as in:

1 John 4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

Retouching this topic, having reread the responses, I have to ask - how do we know exactly what type of grief this man had when Christ told him to sell all he had and follow him? It seems that most are saying he was mourning of a godly type- that he was pricked in conscience and grieved over his sinful love for riches. But to me, when I study the verse, it seems that he is not *yet* grieving in a repentant way, but still focused on his own precious goods and sad or scared that he has to give it all up. Since he's still technically unsaved at that moment, and full of self rrighteousness as obviously appears in the preceding verses, it appears his first gospel call did not do an immediate work of repentance but rather irked his flesh, not getting the hopeful answer he expected. Look at what it says:

Matthew 19:22: But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions

And then in response to his reaction, which Christ perceived and knew, Christ says this to all around him:

"And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!" (From Luke) Different books but same scenario.

What I get from this is that Jesus saw his grief over having to give up his possessions, and used that as a warning to everyone that a man *like this* (young ruler) can scarcely enter the kingdom of heaven. But, that only goes to extol his grace all the more because He actually *loved* a type of sinner who could rarely get into the kingdom. That instead of immediately pronouncing doom upon the man for his rejection (not ultimate rejection but current) of the gospel terms, he actually saves him! As evidenced by Mark 10:21, Jesus "loving him". Of course that gives that the man would ultimately come to his senses and be brought to true penitence over this and all other sins. But as someone noted sanctification doesn't happen all at once and one who first hears the gospel *usually* is not converted and brought to repentance immediately but goes through some type of spiritual struggle before he finally surrenders all, and then mourns for his folly of the love of riches. I say *usually* because I know everyone's conversion experience is as different as we are people, but most that I've read of have been of that sort, rather than the immediate type like Saul. I could be wrong, but just a conjecture based on the thousands of spiritual/conversion narratives I've read .

Anyways back to the topic, that is my understanding of the scenario, but I would indeed be interested to know if this was the man's initial "repentance" or godly mourning, as is purported. Because to me, so far, it seems the opposite. That while indeed elect and beloved of Christ, he still was in his sins at the time and though curious to obtain eternal life the right way, he appeared much 'grieved' at the unbeknownst cost of it, and went away sorrowful *because* he had so many possessions that he was not *yet* ready to give up. Surely as Robert Powell said, God hates those who choose money over him. But he also hates liars, thieves, adulterers, drunkards, prostitutes, etc. And yet He loved and saved countless of them. So might it not be the same case with the ruler? As "while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us"...while he was yet in unrepentant sin, Christ loved him?

Also another thing I am wondering is whether or not the riches in this scenario represent self-righteousness more than actual money. Because a.) the man was highly self-righteous and b.) I've heard it said before that Christ here is not actually saying that wealthy people never enter the kingdom of God, but is referring to our own man made spiritual riches. Because as they said (believe it was Tony), if wealthy people were generally discluded from the kingdom of God, then there goes like half the Saints in the old testament. Just another curiosity of mine.